Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Measuring Case Salience in State Courts of Last Resort

Bibliographic Data

ID6340969
AuthorsRichard L Vining (0000-0001-5769-6289, University of Georgia), Teena Wilhelm (0000-0002-8719-8851, University of Georgia)
Year2011
Volume64
Issue3
Pages559-572
Publication date2011-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Research Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1065-9129 • E-ISSN: 1938-274X
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1065912910361222
OpenAlexW2118634264
LanguageEN
Citations received27
References cited53

Scholars recognize that both citizens and elites may alter their behavior in response to salient stimuli. Epstein and Segal’s (2000) measure of salience for the United States Supreme Court provided a valid and reproducible way to assess the political salience of cases. No comparable measure exists for state high courts. The authors introduce a measure of case salience for state supreme courts that is comprehensive and similar to the Epstein-Segal measure. We discuss the utility of this measure, compare it to several alternatives, provide descriptive statistics, and discuss the relationship between case salience and judicial behavior in state supreme courts

Cognitive psychology · Measure (data warehouse · Political science · Politics · Salience (neuroscience · Salient · Supreme court · Computer Science · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies · Psychology · Social Psychology

  • Examining the Influence of Media Coverage on Information-Seeking of Judicial Candidates

    Open Access•Marcy Shieh•Political Communication•2026

  • The Evolution of State Courts Research in the Twenty-First Century

    Open Access•Brent D Boyea, David A Hughes et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2026

  • Measuring the Political Salience of Supreme Court Cases

    Open Access•Tom S Clark, Jeffrey R Lax et al.•Journal of Law and Courts•2015

  • Justices on Autopilot

    Open Access•Thomas Altmann•Journal of Law and Courts•2025

  • Does Local Journalism Stimulate Voter Participation in State Supreme Court Elections

    Open Access•David A Hughes•Journal of Law and Courts•2020

  • Responsive Justice

    Open Access•Michael J Nelson•Journal of Law and Courts•2014

  • Status characteristics and their intersectionality

    Erin B Kaheny, John Szmer et al.•Politics Groups and Identities•2019

  • Understanding coverage of rights claiming in LGBTQ+ media

    Perry Mcd Collins, Charles E Pierce et al.•Politics Groups and Identities•2025

  • The Signals of Unlikely Allies

    Open Access•Sahar Abi-Hassan•American Politics Research•2025

  • Case Salience in the State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Richard L Vining, Teena Wilhelm et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2024

  • Evaluating diffuse support for state high courts among individuals with varying levels of policy agreement

    Open Access•Damon Cann, Jeff Yates•Social Science Quarterly•2021

  • Effects of selection regimes on state supreme court opinion writing

    Open Access•Marcy Shieh•Social Science Quarterly•2023

  • The importance of salience

    Open Access•Rebecca Bromley‐trujillo, Rebecca Bromley-Trujillo et al.•Journal of Public Policy•2020

  • Beyond Consensus

    Mikel Norris•Women & Politics•2022

  • Women Rule

    Mikel Norris, Holley Tankersley•Women & Politics•2018

  • Stare Decisisand the Electoral Connection

    Open Access•Marilyn G Miller, Michael G Miller et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2020

  • Consensus and Cooperation on State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Meghan E Leonard, Joseph V Ro•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2014

  • New Data on State Supreme Court Cases

    Open Access•Matthew E K Hall, Jason Harold Windett•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2013

  • A Market-Based Model of State Supreme Court News

    Open Access•Richard L Vining, Teena Wilhelm et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2015

  • Judicial Independence and Opinion Clarity on State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Greg Goelzhauser, Damon M Cann et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2014

  • State Courts and Policy Legitimation

    Robert J Hume•Publius The Journal of Federalism•2012

  • Toward an Actor-Based Measure of Supreme Court Case Salience

    Open Access•Ryan C Black, Maron W Sorenson et al.•Political Research Quarterly•2013

  • CJEU judgments in the news – capturing the public salience of decisions of the EU’s highest court

    Julian Dederke•Journal of European Public Policy•2022

  • Friends of the Court? Why EU governments file observations before the Court of Justice

    Open Access•Julian Dederke, Daniel Naurin•European Journal of Political…•2018

  • Ascriptive Characteristics and Perceptions of Impropriety in the Rule of Law

    Open Access•Yoshikuni Ono, Michael A Zilis•American Journal of Political…•2022

  • Case Visibility and the Electoral Connection in State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Damon M Cann, Damon Cann et al.•American Politics Research•2011

  • Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions

    Open Access•Brandice Canes-Wrone, Tom S Clark et al.•American Political Science Review•2014

  • Judicial policies

    Bradley C Canon, Charles A Johnson•Judicial policies•1999

  • Issue Politics in Congress

    Open Access•Tracy Sulkin•Issue politics in Congress•2005

  • Constitutional Review and the Selective Promotion of Case Results

    Open Access•Jeffrey K Staton•American Journal of Political…•2005

  • Congress, The Electoral Connection

    Michael J Ross, David R Mayhew•The Western Political Quarterly•1975

  • Explaining High-Profile Coverage of State Supreme Court Decisions

    Open Access•Richard L Vining, Teena Wilhelm•Social Science Quarterly•2010

  • Congress

    Open Access•Benjamin I Page•Political Science Quarterly•1975

  • Explaining the Overruling of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent

    James F Spriggs, James F Spriggs James F Spriggs et al.•The Journal of Politics•2001

  • The Influence of Values on Consensus and Contentious Morality Policy

    Christopher Z Mooney, Mei-Hsien Lee et al.•The Journal of Politics•2000

  • The Effect of Politically Salient Decisions on the U.S. Supreme Court's Agenda

    Vanessa A Baird•The Journal of Politics•2004

  • Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins•Political Research Quarterly•2007

  • Network Analysis and the Law

    Open Access•J H Fowler, Timothy R Johnson et al.•Political Analysis•2007

  • Lawyers, Justices, and Issue Salience

    Open Access•Andrea Mcatee, Kevin T Mcguire•Law & Society Review•2007

  • U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making, Case Salience, and the Attitudinal Model

    Open Access•Isaac Unah, Ange-Marie Hancock et al.•Law & Policy•2006

  • Neo-Institutionalism and Dissent in State Supreme Courts

    Paul Brace, Melinda Gann Hall•The Journal of Politics•1990

  • The Supreme Court in American Democracy

    Micheal W Giles, Bethany Blackstone et al.•The Journal of Politics•2008

  • Expanding the Integrated Model of Judicial Decision Making

    Carol Ann Traut, Craig F Emmert•The Journal of Politics•1998

  • Integrated Models of Judicial Dissent

    Paul Brace, Melinda Gann Hall•The Journal of Politics•1993

  • Measuring the Preferences of State Supreme Court Judges

    Paul Brace, Laura Langer et al.•The Journal of Politics•2000

  • The Consistency of Judicial Choice

    Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins•The Journal of Politics•2008

  • The Interplay of Preferences, Case Facts, Context, and Rules in the Politics of Judicial Choice

    Paul Brace, Paul R Brace et al.•The Journal of Politics•1997

  • Constituent Influence in State Supreme Courts

    Melinda Gann Hall•The Journal of Politics•1987

  • It's Abortion, Stupid

    Alan I Abramowitz•The Journal of Politics•1995

  • Placing State Supreme Courts in State Politics

    Open Access•Paul Brace, Melinda Gann Hall et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2001

  • The Recall of News Items

    Alan Booth•Public Opinion Quarterly•1970

  • Getting Attention

    Open Access•C Scott Peters•Political Research Quarterly•2007

  • Delaying Justice

    Open Access•Valerie J Hoekstra, Valerie Hoekstra et al.•Political Research Quarterly•2003

  • The Supreme Court and Opinion Content

    Open Access•Pamela C Corley•Political Research Quarterly•2008

  • Strategic Voting for Damage Control On the Supreme Court

    Open Access•Theodore S Arrington, Saul Brenner•Political Research Quarterly•2004

  • A Conditional Model of Opinion Assignment on the Supreme Court

    Open Access•Forrest Maltzman, Paul J Wahlbeck•Political Research Quarterly•2004

  • The Success of Amici in State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Donald R Songer, Ashlyn Kuersten•Political Research Quarterly•1995

  • Front-Page News and Real-World Cues

    Lutz Erbring, Edie N Goldenberg et al.•American Journal of Political…•1980

  • State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty, and the Practice of Electing Judges

    Open Access•Paul Brace, Brent D Boyea•American Journal of Political…•2008

  • Measuring Issue Salience

    Lee Epstein, Jeffrey A Segal•American Journal of Political…•2000

  • Marshalling the Court

    Paul J Wahlbeck, James F Spriggs et al.•American Journal of Political…•1998

  • Explaining Presidential Approval

    George C Edwards, George C Edwards Iii et al.•American Journal of Political…•1995

  • Fluidity on the United States Supreme Court

    Saul Brenner•American Journal of Political…•1980

  • Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study

    John R Petrocik•American Journal of Political…•1996

  • Signals from the Tenth Justice

    Open Access•Michael A Bailey, Brian Kamoie et al.•American Journal of Political…•2005

  • May It Please the Chief? Opinion Assignments in the Rehnquist Court

    Forrest Maltzman, Paul J Wahlbeck•American Journal of Political…•1996

  • Disagreement on the Rehnquist Court

    Open Access•Lori Beth Way, Charles C Turner•American Politics Research•2006

  • The Solicitor General's Amicus Curiae Strategies in the Supreme Court

    Open Access•Chris Nicholson, Perry Mcd Collins et al.•American Politics Research•2008

  • Testing Murphy's Strategic Model

    Open Access•Theodore S Arrington, Saul Brenner•American Politics Research•2008

  • Splitting the Difference

    Open Access•Stefanie A Lindquist, Wendy L Martinek et al.•Law & Society Review•2007

  • Challenges to the Impartiality of State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•James L Gibson•American Political Science Review•2008

  • Ideology, Status, and The Differential Success of Direct Parties Before the Supreme Court

    Open Access•Reginald S Sheehan, William Mishler et al.•American Political Science Review•1992

  • Order in the Courts

    Melinda Gann Hall, Paul Brace•The Western Political Quarterly•1989

Unique citing works27
Citations per year1,8
Citation span2011 - 2026 (16)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 26

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae